Construction company halts work despite overpayment

I ask myself afterwards how crazy we were to take this step.

We are currently FACING this decision. However, with smaller amounts. To forgo €20K or to enforce one's right with a cost risk of around €10K – or to try to enforce it, since even with seemingly clear starting conditions, in court you are like on....

Legal protection is only available through Örag if you take out the loan through the Sparkasse .... other few insurances limit their coverage e.g. to a dispute value of 40K and then you still have to handle the legal dispute yourself .... no one insures you against something that big

Why are you under the burden of proof? Have you already accepted it? If not, the burden of proof is on him.

He reduced the defects from the 1st expert report amounting to approximately €30,000 down to a mere €770.

Yes, but again the question: have you legally accepted it?

If not, then you at least do not owe the money for the roof structure etc., because then he would have to prove the freedom from defects

No, there has been no acceptance yet and we will not accept this crap either. On 01/15/20, a construction status determination is supposed to take place.

We are currently FACED with this decision. However, with smaller amounts. To forgo €20K or to try to enforce one's right with a cost risk of about €10K – or to attempt to enforce it, because even with seemingly clear initial conditions, in court one is like on....

It is clear to you, the judge’s perspective can be quite different.

Example: My mother-in-law was in need of care and was placed in a nursing home. My sister-in-law had the debit card and withdrew money for my mother-in-law when she needed something. However, she did not have power of attorney over the account. After my mother-in-law’s death, it turned out that she withdrew €1000 on each of the two following days, which could hardly have been on my mother-in-law’s behalf. So we requested duplicates of the bank statements and had to find that there had been considerable withdrawals and payments by card during my mother-in-law’s lifetime as well. Since there was no way to reason with my sister-in-law, my husband and his brother sued her. The judge’s decision was to dismiss the claim because it was not proven that my sister-in-law had the withdrawals authorized. But there was only the one card. Since then, my faith in the German judiciary has been shaken.